TARUN AGARWALA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Himanshu Tiwari, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri M.K.Gupta, the learned counsel assisted by Sri Nitin Kumar Agarwal, for the caveators-respondent Nos.2 and 3.
(2.) THE plaintiff-respondent No.1 filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from encashing the bank-drafts and from paying the amount as detailed in Schedule-A to the plaint. It was alleged that the plaintiff had purchased six demand drafts from the defendant/appellant bank, which was payable to the present respondent Nos.2 and 3/defendants, but the said drafts amounting to Rs.25,000/- each, were lost and therefore, the suit for prohibitory injunction. An application for temporary injunction was also filed. The trial court, initially granted an injunction, restraining the bank from getting the bank drafts encashed. Subsequently, on a stay vacating application filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3, the injunction order was vacated and the injunction application of the plaintiff was rejected with a direction that the bank drafts will be converted by the bank in a F.D.R. in the name of the Court. This interim order continue till the pendency of the suit. Eventually, the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed and the trial court while dismissing the suit directed the bank to release the F.D.R. along with the accruing interest in favour of respondent Nos.2 and 3.
(3.) AGGRIEVED , by the dismissal of the suit, the plaintiff filed a First Appeal before the High Court which was subsequently transferred to the lower appellate court. The appeal was eventually dismissed by judgment dated 15.11.2008 and the decree of the trial court was affirmed.;